Friday

“Without a GAL, parties will go back to the old practice of dragging their children into court to testify against their parents,” said Hollander. “The parties will pay top dollar to get pediatricians and counselors to testify and will put their families’ fates in the hands of the very judges that they have come to scorn.”

AUGUSTA, Maine — Divorces and child custody disagreements can be messy and when parents can’t resolve their differences alone, courts appoint a guardian ad litem to investigate the situation and make recommendations.

But there are many people, dozens of whom testified Thursday afternoon in Augusta, who say major flaws detract from the system, ranging from guardian ad litems who charge too much to others whose recommendations are flawed and incomplete. According to testimony heard Thursday by the Legislature’s Judiciary Committee, there are nearly 300 guardian ad litems, or GALs, in Maine.

Numerous people told stories about GALs whose errors and carelessness resulted in unfavorable custody arrangements with their former spouses. One of them was Sen. David Dutremble, D-Biddeford, whose children were assigned a GAL during his divorce in 2004. Dutremble sponsored one of four bills on guardian ad litems that were presented on Thursday.

“I can assure you that the appointment of a guardian ad litem was one of the worst experiences of my life, and I am a full-time firefighter,” said Dutremble. “A GAL’s position is to remain neutral during their appointment to the child and to determine what is in the best interest of the child. This is where the real problem existed in my case. … My guardian was anything but neutral and many guardians continue to remain anything but neutral to this date.”

Other people at the hearing testified that the vast majority of guardian ad litems operate responsibly and equitably. One of them was Ethan Stevens of Chelsea, who said in written testimony to the Judiciary Committee that his first experience with the guardian ad litem system was in 2010 when he began the divorce process after a seven-year marriage.

“I am extremely grateful to have had the services of Maine’s current guardian ad litem system as well as the competence and experience of our particular GAL,” wrote Stevens. “I went from expecting to see my children every other weekend or some similar arrangement to one where custody is split almost in half. The guardian ad litem system is a vital tool to Maine’s overburdened court system.”

Reforms to Maine’s guardian ad litem system have been eyed for years. In 2006 the Legislature’s investigatory Office of Program Evaluation and Government Accountability released an extensive report on the issue. It found that the system has insufficient oversight on any part of the process, including that judges in many cases cannot be confident that they are receiving complete and accurate information.

“Under these circumstances, judicial decision in child protection cases may not be optimal,” reads the OPEGA report. “Because of the way the court administers GAL services, there is little documented, standardized and accessible data to analyze. Therefore, while OPEGA can confidently state that compliance and performance inconsistencies are readily detectable, we cannot quantify the extent of compliance with mandated activities or the effectiveness of GALs themselves. Clearly, there are high-performing, dedicated and effective GALs. There are also too many reports of GALs with questionable performance, particularly regarding contacts with children and interactions with key individuals in children’s lives.”

The Legislature’s Judiciary Committee on Thursday heard testimony on four bills proposed to improve the system:

• LD 522, An Act to Amend the Guardian Ad Litem Laws, sponsored by Sen. Linda Valentino, D-Saco, which seeks to implement the recommendations of a 2012 report by the Guardian Ad Litem Task Force, which was appointed by Maine Supreme Court Chief Justice Leigh Saufley. The report calls for the Supreme Judicial Court to adopt a range of rules covering registration and certification, qualification, practices, training and discipline.

• LD 872, An Act to Improve the Quality of Guardian Ad Litem Services for the Children and Families of Maine, sponsored by Sen. David Dutremble, D-Biddeford, which is based on the recommendations in the OPEGA report.

• LD 975, An Act to Ensure Accountability of Guardians Ad Litem and Parenting Coordinators, sponsored by Rep. Lisa Villa, D-Harrison, which would require a range of training, cap GAL fees, remove the quasi-judicial immunity provided to GALs and parenting coordinators, and open the door for litigation against GALs and parenting coordinators who falsely accuse parties of abuse or neglect or who intentionally exclude relevant information from reports.

“The governor has a strong interest in these efforts, both as someone who has mentored young people as well as his role as chief executive,” said Cianchette. “He has heard firsthand the problems that can exist in our current system, whether it is outrageous billings or odd recommendations to the courts that could result in very negative outcomes.”

Cianchette said LePage supports a current initiative by the Judicial Branch that would cap what GALs can charge their clients, as well as increased oversight, standards of practice, continuing education and immunity.

Toby Hollander, president of the Maine Guardian Ad Litem Institute, took issue with many of the statements made Thursday about GALs and opposed some of the proposed provisions. In particular, he called a proposal to strip GALs of their quasi-judicial immunity, which is contained in Villa’s bill, a “mean-spirited” measure that could destroy the entire system.

“Without a GAL, parties will go back to the old practice of dragging their children into court to testify against their parents,” said Hollander. “The parties will pay top dollar to get pediatricians and counselors to testify and will put their families’ fates in the hands of the very judges that they have come to scorn.”

The bills have not yet been scheduled for further work in the Judiciary Committee.

Florida Family Court Fail Kids and Parents VOTEFamily.US

Mandate 50/50 physical custody nationwide of all FIT Parents, in initial custody issues, make BOTH Parent equally responsible for raising a child. "There's no more important ingredient for success, nothing that would be more important for...

SHARE YOUR STORY

We always encourage all parents and extended family to share experiences of Family Court horrors, or Parental Alienation and its impact on you, your children and family. That way the ripple effect of the information and experiences shared will create positive change for other people who are affected or who may be affected in the future.

Comment anonymously, call yourself whatever you want. Email addresses are strictly confidential, and providing one is optional (but will allow you to be notified of others’ responses and to dialogue immediately if you wish). This blog was viewed over a half a million times. For the public to be aware of procedural abuses, it has to hear about them. The blog author’s own story is here. Civility is the only constraint upon your speech.

3d DCA Watch -- Bye Bye Bunker Edition!
-
So one time in bunker camp the Resplendently Robed Ones™ decided to pretty
much chuck the month of December and go explore the beautiful environs of *Centra...

Stop Court-Ordered Parental Alienation

February 23rd

Obnoxious ‘Renegade’ Justice ~ Family Courts

The abuses of parents and children by Family Courts, social workers, and family law attorneys have harmed parents and children for far too long. We intend to end that abuse

Family court is designed by its makers to be probably the most dangerous life event parents and children can endure. It enables and profits from every inhumane instinct known to man—greed, hate, resentment, fear—resulting in abundant cash flow for the divorce industry and a fallout of parent and children’s misery.

And behind the curtain of this machine of misery we’ve uncovered its cause—the multi-billion dollar divorce industry, populated by judges, attorneys, and a machinery of tax-dollar fed “judicial administrators,” social workers that George Orwell would marvel at.

We’ve been delivering that message kindly for years now, yet the tide keeps rising on families in crisis. We’ve appealed to the county courts, state and local politicians, state judicial oversight bodies, United States Representatives, and just plain old human dignity, but the harassment and abuse of parents and children has only increased. A resort to federal court intervention in the widespread criminal collusion in state government was the next logical step.

It’s time to recognize Family Court for what it is—a corporate crime ring raiding parents and children of financial and psychological well-being, and devouring our children’s futures. And its not just divorce lawyers—its judges, “judicial administrators,” psychologists, cops and prosecutors—people we should be able to trust—in a modern day criminal cabal using county courtrooms and sheriff’s deputies as the machinery of organized crime.

Since state officials’ hands are too deep into the cookie jar to stop their own abuse, we’re seeking the assistance of federal oversight.

The present-day suffering of so many parents and children has and is being wrought within a larger system characterized by a widespread institutional failure of—indeed contempt for—the rule of law.

Family courts, the legal community, professional institutions such as the state bar, psychology boards, and criminal justice institutions have in the recent decade gradually combined to cultivate a joint enterprise forum in which widespread “family practice” exceptions to the rule of law are not only tolerated, but increasingly encouraged. Professional behavior that would only a few years ago be recognized as unethical, illegal, or otherwise intolerable by American legal, psychological, law enforcement, or social work professionals has increasingly achieved acceptance—indeed applause—from institutional interests which benefit from a joint enterprise enforcing the unwritten law of “who you know is more important than what you know.

In this lawless behavior’s most crass infestation, Family Court Judges are regularly heard to announce, in open court, “I am the law” and proceed to act accordingly with impunity, indifference, and without shame.

The effect on parents and children seeking social support within this coalescing “family law” forum has not been as advertised by courts and professionals—a new healing—but instead a new affliction: an ‘imposed disability’ of de rigueur deprivation of fundamental rights in the name of ‘therapeutic jurisprudence’ funded by converting college funds into a bloated ministry of the Bar Associations leaving families and their children with mere crumbs of their own success.

Many family court judges regularly administer such obnoxious ‘renegade’ justice every day, in open defiance of the rule of law. ‘Sober as a judge’ these days has a whole new meaning.

We need reform toward a more humane family dispute resolution solution

Many of our members are mothers, fathers, and children who have withstood abundant hardship resulting from the current practices of what is generally described as the “Family Law Community.”

These injuries and insults include fraudulent, inefficient, harmful, and even dangerous services; an institutionalized culture of indifference to “clearly-established” liberties; insults to the autonomy and dignity of parents and children; extortion, robbery, abuse, and more, delivered at the hands of eager operators within the divorce industry. ~~ CPRW Vid1 - 2016

World4Justice2016

It’s just not possible that intelligent lawyers like judges don’t understand exactly what goes on in their courtrooms, yet they allow it to continue.

This judicial collusion is far more serious crime than even the fraud of divorce attorneys themselves.

We need reform toward a more humane family dispute resolution solution. They’ve treated us as enemies of the state. When we thought we’d be welcomed, or at least heard, we’ve instead become targets of prosecution and terrorist threats. They've assaulted us, harassed our members including threatening “gun cock” and death threat late night phone calls, attacked our businesses, professional licenses, and threatened to jail and extort us with further crime.

It’s outrageous that our own government allows this to happen, and we’re asking the federal court to protect our members as we pursue the civil and criminal charges against the courts. A complete set of filings and exhibits is available from CCFC’s Facebook page at www.Facebook.com/ccfconline ~~ Grandparents and Grandkids World4Justice2016 ~ GR Vid2 -- www.facebook.com/Grandparents4Justice

Jury trials have been unlawfully eliminated as an option in family court by unelected adminstrators, leaving judges to do whatever they want and control the cases completely. The checks and balances of the judicial system have been removed and profit motives win by the gravity of money over decades.

Freedom of speech in the United States

“Will of the people the only legitimate foundation of any government, protect its free expression, our first object.” ~ Thomas Jefferson

"No man is good enough to govern another man without the other's consent."

“There are subtle ways and overt ways of alienating a child from a parent, but either way it’s evil”

Almost always, the creative dedicated minority has made the world better.

Never succumb to the temptation of bitterness.

Stand up for Zoraya

Stand Up For Zoraya

Internet Defense League

Collaborative Family Law

google-site-verification: googlebeb56b04a455e344.html

Strengthening Father-Child Relationships

Posting Rules

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.

By using various interactive features to post content, you are participating in a community intended for all of our users. In general, we reserve the right to remove any content posted on our site at any time for any reason. Without limiting our right to remove content, we have attempted to provide guidelines to those posting on our site. As such, if your behavior becomes a problem for the site or for other users, we may, in our discretion and without warning, ban you. Posting Rules When using this blog, please do not post material that:

§Contains vulgar, profane, abusive, racist or hateful language or expressions, epithets or slurs, text, photographs or illustrations in poor taste, or attacks of a personal, racial or religious nature.

§Discriminates on the grounds of race, religion, national origin, gender, age, marital status, sexual orientation or disability, or refers to such matters in any manner prohibited by law.

§Violates or inappropriately encourages the violation of any municipal, state, federal or international law, rule, regulation or ordinance.

§Interferes with any third party's uninterrupted use of this blog.

§Advertises, promotes or offers to trade any goods or services, except in areas specifically designated for such purpose.

§Includes copyrighted or other proprietary material of any kind without the express permission of the owner of that material.

§Uses or attempts to use another's identity, account, password, service or system except as expressly permitted by the Terms of Service of Google's Blogger.

§Contains or links to viruses or other harmful, disruptive or destructive files.

§disrupts, interferes with, or otherwise harms or violates the security of StAugustine.com, or any services, system resources, accounts, passwords, servers or networks connected to or accessible through StAugustine.com or affiliated or linked sites.

§"flames" any individual or entity (e.g., sends repeated messages related to another user and/or makes derogatory or offensive comments about another individual)